Paul Barnhurst compares two financial modeling approaches: SMART works better for large, complex models that need flexibility, while FAST suits smaller models requiring detailed line-item transparency. Bid models and project finance benefit from FAST's granular calculations, but corporate models aggregating many projects favor SMART's higher-level structure.
You generally go with SMART when you need more flexibility, as maybe it's a bigger, a little more complex model. When you're building something a little more standardized, a smaller model, you like the FAST, and then it's a little more detailed in what you need to do.
If I give like an example, in the bid model or like project finance model, we have someone which is working from deal team and they are looking into the model, the revenue part. They want to see the tariff there clearly labeled so that they can relate it with the calculation, the flags and everything. The fastbook better there because it gives more of the detail of the lines when we do the calculations. But when we are going to the corporate models or like portfolio models, there we have a very big sheets of calculations for like different projects, for one asset covers one SPV.
Trust and Leadership Lessons for FP&A From 100+ Top Leaders with CFO Jon Laudie
